Evaluating the Ergonomic Performance of a Novel Periodontal Curette with Adaptive Handle Design

Hygiene Pub Date : 2024-04-22 DOI:10.3390/hygiene4020013
C. Wink, K. Lin, Ben Dolan, Kathryn Osann, Ali A. Habib, Petra Wilder-Smith
{"title":"Evaluating the Ergonomic Performance of a Novel Periodontal Curette with Adaptive Handle Design","authors":"C. Wink, K. Lin, Ben Dolan, Kathryn Osann, Ali A. Habib, Petra Wilder-Smith","doi":"10.3390/hygiene4020013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"(1) Background: Periodontal instrumentation with dental curettes is associated with discomfort, fatigue, and musculoskeletal diseases. The goal of this study was to compare comfort, fatigue, and muscle work using three different curettes. (2) Methods: Eight hygienists each scaled three typodonts using the three different curettes. Curette A was a prototype with a novel adaptive design, Curette B had a conventional stainless-steel design, and Curette C featured a conventional silicon-covered handle. Time-based work in four muscles, comfort, fatigue, tactile feedback, grip and blade position, and pinch and grasp strength were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using a General Linear Model (GLIM) and Tukey’s post hoc test. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05. (3) Results: Comfort, correct grasp, fingertip placement, and blade-to-tooth adaptation were significantly better with Curette A (p < 0.05). While pinch and grasp strength were significantly reduced post-instrumentation for Curettes B and C (p < 0.05), they remained unchanged for Curette A. Curette A required significantly less total muscle work and work in individual muscles, resulting in significantly less post-instrumentation fatigue than for Curettes B and C, but similar levels of tactile feedback (p < 0.05). (4) Conclusions: The ergonomic performance of a prototype adaptive periodontal curette was significantly better than that of two conventional instruments with rigid handle designs.","PeriodicalId":513294,"journal":{"name":"Hygiene","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/hygiene4020013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

(1) Background: Periodontal instrumentation with dental curettes is associated with discomfort, fatigue, and musculoskeletal diseases. The goal of this study was to compare comfort, fatigue, and muscle work using three different curettes. (2) Methods: Eight hygienists each scaled three typodonts using the three different curettes. Curette A was a prototype with a novel adaptive design, Curette B had a conventional stainless-steel design, and Curette C featured a conventional silicon-covered handle. Time-based work in four muscles, comfort, fatigue, tactile feedback, grip and blade position, and pinch and grasp strength were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using a General Linear Model (GLIM) and Tukey’s post hoc test. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05. (3) Results: Comfort, correct grasp, fingertip placement, and blade-to-tooth adaptation were significantly better with Curette A (p < 0.05). While pinch and grasp strength were significantly reduced post-instrumentation for Curettes B and C (p < 0.05), they remained unchanged for Curette A. Curette A required significantly less total muscle work and work in individual muscles, resulting in significantly less post-instrumentation fatigue than for Curettes B and C, but similar levels of tactile feedback (p < 0.05). (4) Conclusions: The ergonomic performance of a prototype adaptive periodontal curette was significantly better than that of two conventional instruments with rigid handle designs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估采用自适应手柄设计的新型牙周刮匙的人体工学性能
(1) 背景:使用牙科刮治器进行牙周器械治疗与不适、疲劳和肌肉骨骼疾病有关。本研究的目的是比较三种不同刮治器的舒适度、疲劳度和肌肉工作情况。(2)方法:八名卫生学家每人使用三种不同的刮治器刮治三颗类型牙。A 型刮刀是一种具有新颖自适应设计的原型,B 型刮刀采用传统的不锈钢设计,C 型刮刀采用传统的硅胶包覆手柄。研究人员记录了四块肌肉的工作时间、舒适度、疲劳度、触觉反馈、握把和刀片位置以及夹持和抓握力度。统计分析采用一般线性模型(GLIM)和 Tukey 后检验法进行。显著性水平设定为 p < 0.05。(3) 结果:使用 Curette A 时,舒适度、正确抓握、指尖位置和刀片与牙齿的适应性明显更好(p < 0.05)。与 B 和 C 相比,A 型刮匙所需的总肌肉工作量和单个肌肉工作量均显著减少,因此使用 A 型刮匙后的疲劳程度显著降低,但触觉反馈水平却与 B 和 C 相似(p < 0.05)。(4) 结论:自适应牙周刮治器原型的人体工学性能明显优于两种采用刚性手柄设计的传统器械。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Unveiling the Mechanisms for Campylobacter jejuni Biofilm Formation Using a Stochastic Mathematical Model A Combined Cleaning and Disinfection Measure to Decontaminate Tire Treads from Tomato Brown Rugose Fruit Virus Contamination of High-Touch Surfaces in the Ophthalmic Clinical Environment—A Pilot Study Comparison of the Proteome of Staphylococcus aureus Planktonic Culture and 3-Day Biofilm Reveals Potential Role of Key Proteins in Biofilm Oral Hygiene Practices and Oral Health Knowledge among Adult Orthodontic Patients: A Best Practice Implementation Project
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1